CONSUMER RESPONSE TO GMO FOODS: BRANDING VERSUS GOVERNMENT CERTIFICATION

The debate over the safety of genetically modified organisms (GMO's) has varied greatly in intensity. In Europe, the debate has been vigorous and European consumers have, in general, been extremely skeptical of the technology and unwilling to assume the risks associated with GMOs. Many retailers in Europe have promised that they will not sell food products that contain GMOs. In the U.S., consumer reaction to GMOs has been more muted. While some surveys have shown that a majority of Americans support the use of biotechnology, others have found that many Americans have reservations about the technology. Most of the research published to date has focused on consumer opinions regarding GMOs. Relatively little research has focused on understanding the basis of consumer opinion or developing or evaluating strategies targeted at gaining consumer acceptance of GMO products. The purpose of this research is to evaluate the effect of two potential strategies to gain consumer acceptance of GMO foods. Specifically, we examine the effectiveness of using a familiar brand or federal government certification on consumer acceptance of GMOs. This research is timely because the rapid pace of GMO development and adoption will soon make it difficult, if not impossible, to maintain separate products based on the presence or absence of GMO content. The conceptual basis for the model used in this paper is Lancaster's theory of consumer demand. The paper discusses the results of the analysis that was undertaken.Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety, Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies,

Who Should Certify the Safety of Genetically Modified Foods?

Two methods of addressing consumer concerns regarding the use of genetically modified foods are evaluated using conjoint analysis – the use of a familiar brand and government certification. In one survey, consumers were asked to rate hypothetical products based on brand, price, and production technology attributes. In a second survey, consumers rated hypothetical products that included government certification, price, and production technology attributes. Both the individual and aggregate results indicate that government certification would be more effective at assuaging consumers concerns than would the use of a familiar brand, although a familiar brand was sufficient to address consumer concerns for a significant number of respondents. The analysis also indicated that different factors are associated with strong consumer preferences for a familiar brand and government certification.Branding, Certification, Consumer demand, Genetically modified food, GMO, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety,

Structures of K0.05Na0.95NbO3 (50–300 K) and K0.30Na0.70NbO3 (100–200 K)

Rietveld refinement using neutron powder diffraction data is reported for the potential lead-free piezoelectric material KxNa1 - xNbO3 (x = 0.05, x = 0.3) at low temperatures. The structures were determined to be of rhombohedral symmetry, space group R3c, with the tilt system a-a-a- for both compositions. It was found that some of the structural parameters differ significantly in the two structures, and particularly the NbO6 octahedral strains as a function of temperature. The 300 K profile for K0.05Na0.95NbO3 shows the coexistence of rhombohedral and monoclinic phases, which indicates that the phase boundary is close to room temperature; the phase boundary for K0.30Na0.70NbO3 is found to be at approximately 180 K